1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to an AEV. This AEV contains a system in which the driving wheels are propelled by a DC motor. The DC motor is powered by a WTG and RESS. This WTG typically produces power collected from the air flow when the vehicle is in motion. In driving conditions where the WTG will not experience the necessary airflow to produce enough energy the air motor will torque the shaft of the WTG. This torque of the shaft of the WTG duplicates the condition of airflow when the vehicle is in motion. In turn; power is produced. This AEV is created out of the need to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions and to extend the driving distance to more than 35 miles per gallon as compared to the existing hybrid vehicles. This vehicle presents an environmentally friendly mode of transportation that produces zero carbon dioxide emissions. The emissions in this AEV are completely eliminated by the use of a DC motor, WTG, and air motor assembly. The WTG replaces the combustible engine in that it recharges the batteries and energizes the DC motor. The WTG powers the central control unit (CCU). The CCU accepts energy created by the WTG. The energy in the CCU is redirected to the RESS (battery) and to a DC motor according to the demands of the vehicle. When rush our driving conditions are present the air motor supply's the necessary torque to the shaft of the WTG such that power is produced as a result.
2. Discussion of the Prior Art
For many years great attention has been given to the problem of reduction of fuel consumption of automobiles and other highway vehicles. Concomitantly very substantial attention has been paid to reduction of pollutants emitted by automobiles and other vehicles. To a degree, efforts to solve these problems conflict with one another. For example, increased thermodynamic efficiency and thus reduced fuel consumption can be realized if an engine is operated at higher temperatures. Thus there has been substantial interest in engines built of ceramic materials withstanding higher combustion temperatures than those now in use. However, higher combustion temperatures in gasoline-fueled engines lead to increase in certain undesirable pollutants, typically NO. Another possibility for reducing emissions is to burn mixtures of gasoline and ethanol, or straight ethanol. However, to date ethanol has not become economically competitive with gasoline, and consumers have not accepted ethanol to any great degree. Moreover, to make an alternate fuel such as ethanol available to the extent necessary to achieve appreciable improvements in nationwide air quality and fuel conservation would require immense costs for infrastructure improvements; not only the entire nation's motor fuel production and delivery system, but also the vehicle manufacture, distribution, and repair system, would have to be extensively revised or substantially duplicated. There have been ideas for reducing pollution in cities by limiting the use of vehicles powered by internal combustion engines and instead employ electric vehicles powered by rechargeable batteries. To date, all such “straight electric” cars have had very limited range, typically no more than 150 miles, have insufficient power for acceleration and hill climbing except when the batteries are substantially fully charged, and require substantial time for battery recharging. The latest air vehicles are considered limited in mileage. They typically require the driver to stop periodically at a filler station to add air to the air tanks on the vehicle. Also the idea of rapidly charging batteries is amiss. What would happen if the power grid were unavailable because of a weather storm? Do we stay home because our batteries are not charged? Thus, while there are many circumstances in which the limited range and extended recharging time of the batteries would not be an inconvenience, such cars are not suitable for all the travel requirements of most individuals. Accordingly, an electric car would have to be an additional vehicle for most users, posing a substantial economic deterrent. Moreover, it will be appreciated that in the United States most electricity is generated in coal-fired power plants, so that using electric vehicles merely moves the source of the pollution, but does not eliminate it. Furthermore, comparing the respective net costs per mile of driving, electric vehicles are not competitive with ethanol-fueled vehicles, much less with conventional gasoline-fueled vehicles. See, generally, Simanaitis, “Electric Vehicles”, Road & Track, May 1992, pp. 126-136; Reynolds, “AC Propulsion CRX”, Road & Track, October 1992, pp. 126-129.
Much attention has also been paid over the years to development of electric vehicles including internal combustion engines powering generators, thus eliminating the defect of limited range exhibited by simple electric vehicles. The simplest such vehicles operate on the same general principle as diesel-electric locomotives used by most railroads. In such systems, an internal combustion engine drives a generator providing electric power to traction motors connected directly to the wheels of the vehicle. This system has the advantage that no variable gear ratio transmission is required between the engine and the wheels of the vehicle. More particularly, an internal combustion engine produces zero torque at zero engine speed (RPM) and reaches its torque peak somewhere in the middle of its operating range. Accordingly, all vehicles driven directly by an internal combustion engine (other than certain single-speed vehicles using friction or centrifugal clutches, and not useful for normal driving) require a variable-ratio transmission between the engine and the wheels, so that the engine's torque can be matched to the road speeds and loads encountered. Further, some sort of clutch must be provided so that the engine can be mechanically decoupled from the wheels, allowing the vehicle to stop while the engine is still running, and to allow some slippage of the engine with respect to the drive train while starting from a stop. It would not be practical to provide a diesel locomotive, for example, with a multiple speed transmission, or a clutch. Accordingly, the additional complexity of the generator and electric traction motors is accepted. Electric traction motors produce full torque at zero RPM and thus can be connected directly to the wheels; when it is desired that the train should accelerate, the diesel engine is simply throttled to increase the generator output and the train begins to move. Typically, the number of diesel locomotives on a train is selected in accordance with the total tonnage to be moved and the grades to be overcome, so that all the locomotives can be operated at nearly full torque production. Moreover, such locomotives tend to be run at steady speeds for long periods of time. Reasonably efficient fuel use is thus achieved. However, such a direct drive vehicle would not achieve good fuel efficiency in typical automotive use, involving many short trips, frequent stops in traffic as well as extended low-speed operation. Another flavor of electric vehicles call “series hybrid” have been proposed for automotive use, wherein batteries are used as energy storage devices, so that an internal combustion engine provided to power a generator can be operated in its most fuel-efficient output power range while still allowing the electric traction motor(s) powering the vehicle to be operated as required. Thus the engine may be loaded by supplying torque to a generator charging the batteries while supplying electrical power to the traction motor(s) as required, so as to operate efficiently. This system overcomes the limitations of electric vehicles noted above with respect to limited range and long recharge times. Thus, as compared to a conventional vehicle, wherein the internal combustion engine delivers torque directly to the wheels, in a series hybrid electric vehicle, torque is delivered from, the engine to the wheels via a serially connected generator used as a battery charger, the battery, and the traction motor. However, energy transfer between those components consumes at least approximately 25% of engine power. Further, such components add substantially to the cost and weight of the vehicle; in particular, an electric motor capable of providing sufficient torque to meet all expected demand, e.g., to allow reasonable performance under acceleration, during hill-climbing and the like, is rather heavy and expensive. Thus, series hybrid vehicles have not been immediately successful. A more promising “parallel hybrid” approach is shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,566,717 and 3,732,751 to Berman et al. In Berman et al an internal combustion engine and an electric motor are matched through a complex gear train so that both can provide torque directly to the wheels, the vehicle being operated in several different modes. Where the output of the internal combustion engine is more than necessary to drive the vehicle (“first mode operation”) the engine is run at constant speed and excess power is converted by a first motor/generator (“speeder”) to electrical energy for storage in a battery. In “second mode operation”, the internal combustion engine drives the wheels directly, and is throttled. When more power is needed than the engine can provide, a second motor/generator or “torquer” provides additional torque as needed. Berman et al thus show two separate electric motor/generators separately powered by the internal combustion engine; the “speeder” charges the batteries, while the “torquer” propels the vehicle forward in traffic. This arrangement is a source of additional complexity, cost and difficulty, as two separate modes of engine control are required. Moreover, the operator must control the transition between the several modes of operation. Such a complex vehicle is unsuited for the automotive market. Automobiles intended for mass production can be no more complicated to operate than conventional vehicles, and must be resistant to damage that might be caused by operator error. Further, the gear train shown by Berman et al appears to be quite complex and difficult to manufacture economically. Berman et al also indicate that one or even two variable-speed transmissions may be required; see, e.g., col. 3, lines 19-22 and 36-38 of U.S. Pat. No. 3,566,717, and col. 2, lines 53-55 of U.S. Pat. No. 3,732,751. Lynch et al U.S. Pat. No. 4,165,795 also shows an early parallel hybrid drive. Lynch argues that maximum fuel efficiency can be realized when a relatively small internal combustion engine is provided, such that when the engine is operated at an efficient speed, it produces approximately the average power required over a typical mission. The example given is of an engine producing 25 hp maximum and 17 hp at its most efficient speed, about 2500 rpm. This is to be combined with an electric motor-generator of about 30 peak hp. This vehicle requires a variable-ratio transmission to achieve reasonable performance. It appears that the engine is to be run continuously, at a steady speed, with additional torque provided by the motor when needed and excess torque produced by the engine being used to charge the batteries. In a first embodiment, torque provided by the motor is transmitted to the drive wheels through the engine, while in a second embodiment their respective positions are reversed.
Nishida U.S. Pat. No. 5,117,931 shows a parallel hybrid vehicle where torque from an electric motor may be combined with torque from an internal combustion engine in a “torque transmission unit” comprising paired bevel gears and means for controlling the relative rates of rotation of the motor and engine, so that the motor can be used to start the engine, absorb excess torque from the engine (by charging a battery), or provide additional propulsive torque. A variable-speed transmission is coupled between the torque transmission unit and the propelling wheels. Both the torque transmission unit and the variable-speed transmission are complex, heavy, and expensive components, the use of which would preferably be avoided.
Helling U.S. Pat. No. 3,923,115 also shows a hybrid vehicle having a torque transmission unit for combining torque from an electric motor and an internal combustion engine. However, in Helling the relative rates of rotation of the motor and engine input shafts are fixed; a flywheel is provided to store excess mechanical energy as well as a battery to store excess electrical energy. Albright, Jr. et al U.S. Pat. No. 4,588,040 shows another hybrid drive scheme using a flywheel in addition to batteries to store excess energy; various complicated mechanical connections are provided between the various components. Capacitors have also been proposed for energy storage; see Bates et al U.S. Pat. No. 5,318,142. Fjallstrom U.S. Pat. No. 5,120,282 shows a parallel hybrid drive train wherein torque from two electric motors is combined with torque produced by an internal combustion engine; the combination is performed by a complex arrangement of paired planetary gear sets, and unspecified control means are alleged to be able to allow variation of road speed without a variable-ratio transmission. Hunt U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,405,029 and 4,470,476 also
disclose parallel hybrids requiring complex gearing arrangements, including multiple speed transmissions. More specifically, the Hunt patents disclose several embodiments of parallel hybrid vehicles. Hunt indicates (see col. 4, lines 6-20 of the '476 patent) that an electric motor may drive the vehicle at low speeds up to 20 mph, and an internal combustion engine used for speeds above 20 mph, while “in certain speed ranges, such as from 15-30 mph, both power sources may be energized . . . . Additionally, both power sources could be utilized under heavy load conditions.” Hunt also indicates that “the vehicle could be provided with an automatic changeover device which automatically shifts from the electrical power source to the internal combustion power source, depending on the speed of the vehicle” (col. 4, lines 12-16). However, the Hunt vehicle does not meet the objects of the present invention, as discussed in detail below. Hunt's vehicle in each embodiment requires a conventional manual or automatic transmission. See col. 2, lines 6-7. Moreover, the internal combustion engine is connected to the transfer case (wherein torque from the internal combustion engine and electric motor is combined) by a “fluid coupling or torque converter of conventional construction”. Col. 2, lines 16-17. Such transmissions and fluid couplings or torque converters are very inefficient, are heavy, bulky, and costly, and are to be eliminated according to one object of the present invention, again as discussed in detail below. Furthermore, the primary means of battery charging disclosed by Hunt involves a further undesirable complexity, namely a turbine driving the electric motor in generator configuration. The turbine is fueled by waste heat from the internal combustion engine. See col. 3, lines 10-60. Hunt's internal combustion engine is also fitted with an alternator, for additional battery charging capability, adding yet further complexity. Thus it is clear that Hunt fails to teach a hybrid vehicle meeting the objects of the present invention—that is, a hybrid vehicle competitive with conventional vehicles with respect to performance, cost and complexity, while achieving substantially improved fuel efficiency.
Kawakatsu U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,305,254 and 4,407,132 show a parallel hybrid involving a single internal combustion engine coupled to the drive wheels through a conventional variable-ratio transmission, an electric motor, and an alternator, to allow efficient use of the internal combustion engine. As in the Hunt disclosure, the engine is intended to be operated in a relatively efficient range of engine speeds; when it produces more torque than is needed to propel the vehicle, the excess is used to charge the batteries; where the engine provides insufficient torque, the motor is energized as well. A further Kawakatsu U.S. Pat. No. 4,335,429, shows a hybrid vehicle, in this case comprising an internal combustion engine and two motor/generator units. A first larger motor/generator, powered by a battery, is used to provide additional torque when that provided by the engine is insufficient; the larger motor-generator also converts excess torque provided by the engine into electrical energy, to be stored by the battery, and is used in a regenerative braking mode. The second smaller motor/generator is similarly used to provide additional torque and additional regenerative braking as needed. More particularly, the latter Kawakatsu patent asserts that a single electric motor sized to provide sufficient torque to propel the vehicle would not be capable of providing sufficient regenerative braking force; see col. 1, line 50-col. 2 lines 8. Accordingly, Kawakatsu provides two separate motor/generators, as noted; a separate engine starting motor is also provided. See col. 6, lines 22-23. In the embodiment shown, the larger motor/generator is connected to the wheel drive shaft, while the engine and the smaller motor/generator are connected to the wheels through a complex mechanism comprising three separately-controllable clutches. See col. 5, lines 50-62. Numerous patents disclose hybrid vehicle drives tending to fall into one or more of the categories discussed above. A number of patents disclose systems wherein an operator is required to select between electric and internal combustion operation; for example, an electric motor is provided for operation inside buildings where exhaust fumes would be dangerous, and an internal combustion engine provided for operation outdoors. It is also known to propose a hybrid vehicle comprising an electric motor for use at low speeds, and an internal combustion engine for use at higher speed. The art also suggests using both when maximum torque is required. In several cases the electric motor drives one set of wheels and the internal combustion engine drives a different set. See generally Shea (U.S. Pat. No. 4,180,138); Fields et al (U.S. Pat. No. 4,351,405); Kenyon (U.S. Pat. No. 4,438,342); Krohling (U.S. Pat. No. 4,593,779); and Eller's (U.S. Pat. No. 4,923,025).
Many of these patents show hybrid vehicle drives wherein a variable speed transmission is required, as do numerous additional references. A transmission as noted above is typically required where the internal combustion engine and/or the electric motor are not capable of supplying sufficient torque at low speeds. See Rosen (U.S. Pat. No. 3,791,473); Rosen (U.S. Pat. No. 4,269,280); Fiala (U.S. Pat. No. 4,400,997); and Wu et al (U.S. Pat. No. 4,697,660). Kinoshita (U.S. Pat. No. 3,970,163) shows a vehicle of this general type wherein a gas turbine engine is coupled to the road wheels through a three-speed transmission; an electric motor is provided to supply additional torque at low speeds. For further examples of series hybrid vehicles generally as discussed above, see Bray (U.S. Pat. No. 4,095,664); Cummings (U.S. Pat. No. 4,148,192); Monaco et al (U.S. Pat. No. 4,306,156); Park (U.S. Pat. No. 4,313,080); McCarthy (U.S. Pat. No. 4,354,144); Heidemeyer (U.S. Pat. No. 4,533,011); Kawamura (U.S. Pat. No. 4,951,769); and Suzuki et al (U.S. Pat. No. 5,053,632). Several of these address specific problems arising in the manufacture or use of hybrid vehicles, or specific alleged design improvements. For Example, Park addresses certain specifics of battery charging and discharge characteristics, while McCarthy shows a complex drive system involving an internal combustion engine driving two electric motors; the torque generated by the latter is combined in a complex differential providing continuously variable gear ratios. Heidemeyer shows connecting an internal combustion engine to an electric motor by a first friction clutch, and connecting the motor to a transmission by a second friction clutch. Other patents of general relevance to this subject matter include Toy (U.S. Pat. No. 3,525,874), showing a series hybrid using a gas turbine as internal combustion engine; Yardney (U.S. Pat. No. 3,650,345), showing use of a compressed-air or similar mechanical starter for the internal combustion engine of a series hybrid, such that batteries of limited current capacity could be used; and Nakamura (U.S. Pat. No. 3,837,419), addressing improvements in thyristor battery-charging and motor drive circuitry. Somewhat further afield but of general interest are the disclosures of Deane (U.S. Pat. No. 3,874,472); Horwinski (U.S. Pat. No. 4,042,056); Yang (U.S. Pat. No. 4,562,894); Keedy (U.S. Pat. No. 4,611,466); and Lexen (U.S. Pat. No. 4,815,334); Mori (U.S. Pat. No. 3,623,568); Grady, Jr. (U.S. Pat. No. 3,454,122); Papst (U.S. Pat. No. 3,211,249); Nims et al (U.S. Pat. No. 2,666,492); and Matsukata (U.S. Pat. No. 3,502,165). Additional references showing parallel hybrid vehicle drive systems include Froelich (U.S. Pat. No. 1,824,014) and Reinbeck (U.S. Pat. No. 3,888,325). U.S. Pat. No. 4,578,955 to Medina shows a hybrid system wherein a gas turbine is used to drive a generator as needed to charge batteries. Of particular interest to certain aspects of the present invention is that Medina discloses that the battery pack should have a voltage in the range of 144, 168 or 216 volts and the generator should deliver current in the range of 400 to 500 amperes. Those of skill in the art will recognize that these high currents involve substantial resistance heating losses, and additionally require that all electrical connections be made by positive mechanical means such as bolts and nuts, or by welding. More specifically, for reasons of safety and in accordance with industry practice, currents in excess of about 50 amperes cannot be carried by the conventional plug-in connectors preferred for reasons of convenience and economy, but must be carried by much heavier, more expensive and less convenient fixed connectors (as used on conventional starter and battery cable connections). Accordingly, it would be desirable to operate the electric motor of a hybrid vehicle at lower currents. U.S. Pat. No. 5,765,656 to Weaver also shows a series hybrid wherein a gas turbine is used as the internal combustion engine; hydrogen is the preferred fuel. U.S. Pat. No. 4,439,989 to Yamakawa shows a system wherein two different internal combustion engines are provided, so that only one need be run when the load is low. This arrangement would be complex and expensive to manufacture. Detailed discussion of various aspects of hybrid vehicle drives may be found in Kalberlah, “Electric Hybrid Drive Systems for Passenger Cars and Taxis”, SAE Paper No. 910247 (1991). Kalberlah first compares “straight” electric, series hybrid, and parallel hybrid drive trains, and concludes that parallel hybrids are preferable, at least when intended for general use (that is, straight electric vehicles may be useful under certain narrow conditions of low-speed, limited range urban driving). Kalberlah then compares various forms of parallel hybrids, with respect to his FIG. 4, and concludes that the most practical arrangement is one in which an internal combustion engine drives a first pair of wheels, and an electric motor the second; more particularly, Kalberlah indicates that mechanical combination of the torque from an internal combustion engine and an electric motor is impractical.
Gardner U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,301,764 and 5,346,031 follow Kalberlah's teachings, in that Gardner shows separately driving at least two pairs of wheels; one pair is driven by a first electric motor, and the second by a second electric motor or alternatively by a small internal combustion engine. Three different clutches are provided to allow various sources of drive torque to be connected to the wheels, and to a generator, depending on the vehicle's operation mode. The internal combustion engine is run continuously, and provides the driving torque when the vehicle is in a cruise mode; at other times it is used to charge the batteries powering the electric motors. Bullock, “The Technological Constraints of Mass, Volume, Dynamic Power Range and Energy Capacity on the Viability of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles”, SAE Paper No. 891659 (1989) provides a detailed theoretical analysis of electric vehicles in terms of the loads thereon, and a careful analysis of the various battery types then available. Bullock concludes that a vehicle having two electric motors of differing characteristics, driving the wheels through a variable-speed transmission, would be optimal for automotive use; see the discussion of FIG. 8. Bullock also suggests the use of an internal combustion engine to drive battery charging, but does not address combining the engine's torque with that from the motors; see pp. 24-25.
Further related papers are collected in Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Technology, volume SP-915, published by SAE in February 1992. See also Wouk, “Hybrids: Then and Now”; Bates, “On the road with a Ford HEV”, and King et al, “Transit Bus takes the Hybrid Route”, all in IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 32, 7, (July 1995).
Urban et al U.S. Pat. No. 5,667,029 shows two embodiments of parallel hybrids; a first embodiment is shown in FIGS. 1-9 and 11, and a second in FIGS. 12-17. Both embodiments have numerous common features, including similar operating modes. Referring to the first embodiment, an internal combustion engine provides torque to the road wheels or to a generator; two electric motors can provide torque to the road wheels, or charge batteries during regenerative braking. Torque from the engine and motors is combined at the input shaft to a variable-ratio transmission. Overrunning clutches are provided, e.g., to allow the engine's torque to be applied to the road wheels without also rotating the motors.
As indicated at col. 6, lines 25-54, certain transitions between various operating modes are made automatically, responsive to the position of the accelerator pedal; for example, if the operator does not depress the pedal beyond a given point, only the internal combustion engine is employed to propel the vehicle; if the operator depresses the pedal more fully, the electric motors are also energized. Other changes in the operational mode must be made by the operator directly; for example, the vehicle may be operated as a “straight electric” vehicle, e.g. for short duration trips, by the operator's making an appropriate control action. See col. 7, lines 49-56.
The Urban et al design appears to suffer from a number of significant defects. First, the internal combustion engine is stated to provide all torque needed to accelerate the vehicle to cruising speed under normal circumstances (see col. 5, lines 3-10), and also to propel the vehicle during cruising (see col. 6, lines 48-54). The electric motors are to be used only during rapid acceleration and hill-climbing; col. 5, lines 10-13. A 20 horsepower engine, operated through a continuously variable-ratio transmission and a torque converter, is stated to be adequate for this purpose. Such components are clearly complex and expensive; further, torque converters are notoriously inefficient. Moreover, using the internal combustion engine as the sole source of power for low-speed running would require it to be run at low speeds, e.g., at traffic lights, which is very inefficient and highly polluting. (Various additional references suggest that excess torque can be used to charge batteries; if this were incorporated in the Urban system, the engine might be run at a reasonably efficient output level while the vehicle was stationary, but this would lead to high levels of noise and vibration. In any event Urban does not appear to consider this possibility.) On the other hand, Urban does suggest that the vehicle can be operated as a “straight electric” under low-speed conditions, but this requires the operator to provide an explicit control input; this complexity is unacceptable in a vehicle intended to be sold in quantity, as would be required in order to reach Urban's stated goals of reduction of atmospheric pollution and reduced energy consumption. As noted, hybrid vehicle operation must be essentially “foolproof”, or “transparent” to the user, to have any chance of commercial success. Urban's second embodiment is mechanically simpler, employing but a single “dynamotor”, through which torque is transmitted from the engine to the variable-ratio transmission, but suffers from the same operational deficiencies. A second Urban et al patent, U.S. Pat. No. 5,704,440, is directed to the method of operation of the vehicle of the '029 patent and suffers the same inadequacies. Various articles describe several generations of Toyota Motor Company hybrid vehicles, believed to correspond to that available commercially as the “Prius”. See, for example, Yamaguchi, “Toyota readies gasoline/electric hybrid system”, Automotive Engineering, July 1997, pp. 55-58; Wilson, “Not Electric, Not Gasoline, But Both”, Autoweek, Jun. 2, 1997, pp. 17-18; Bulgin, “The Future Works, Quietly”, Autoweek Feb. 23, 1998, pp. 12 and 13; and “Toyota Electric and Hybrid Vehicles”, a Toyota brochure. A more detailed discussion of the Toyota vehicle's powertrain is found in Nagasaka et al, “Development of the Hybrid/Battery ECU for the Toyota Hybrid System”, SAE paper 981122 (1998), pp. 19-27. According to the Wilson article, Toyota describes this vehicle as a “series-parallel hybrid”; regardless of the label applied, its powertrain appears to be similar to that of the Berman patents described above, that is, torque from either or both of an internal combustion engine and an electric motor are controllably combined in a “power-split mechanism” and transmitted to the drive wheels through a planetary gearset providing the functionality of a variable-ratio transmission. See the Nagasaka article at pp. 19-20. Furutani U.S. Pat. No. 5,495,906 describes a vehicle having an internal combustion engine driving a first set of wheels through a variable-ratio transmission and an electric motor driving a second set of wheels. The engine is apparently intended to be run continuously; at low speeds, it drives a generator to charge batteries providing energy to the motor and at higher speeds the engine or both engine and motor propel the vehicle. In some circumstances the transmission may not be required; compare, for example, col. 3, lines 4-8 with col. 5, lines 59-64.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,842,534 to Frank shows a “charge depletion” control method for hybrid vehicles; in this scheme, the internal combustion engine is essentially used only when the state of the batteries is such that the vehicle cannot otherwise reach a recharging point. See col. 3, lines 50-55. In normal operation, the batteries are recharged from an external power source. Frank also discusses two-mode brake pedal operation, wherein mechanical brakes are engaged in addition to regenerative braking when the pedal is depressed beyond a preset point.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,823,280 to Lateur et al shows a parallel hybrid wherein the shafts of an internal combustion engine and first and second electric motors are all coaxial; the engine is connected to the first motor by a clutch, and the first motor to the second by a planetary gear set, allowing the speeds of the motors to be varied so as to operate them in their most efficient range. See col. 4, line 57-col. 5, and line 60.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,826,671 to Nakae et al shows a parallel hybrid wherein torque from an internal combustion engine is combined with that from a motor in a planetary gear set; a clutch is provided there between. The specific invention relates to sensing of engine warm-up conditions, so as to limit emission of unburned fuel and thus lower emissions.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,846,155 to Taniguchi et al shows a parallel hybrid wherein torque from an internal combustion engine and a motor is again combined in a planetary gear set; the specific improvement appears to be the use of a continuously-variable transmission. It will be appreciated by those of skill in the art that there are significant limitations inherent in the use of planetary gear sets as a means for connecting different sources, e.g., an internal combustion engine and an electric motor, to the drive wheels of a vehicle, namely, that unless the planetary gear set is effectively locked (anathematic to its use as a continuously-variable transmission, e.g., in the Toyota vehicle) it is capable of additive combination of shaft speeds, but not of output torque. Hence, the principal advantage of the parallel hybrid drivetrain, additive combination of the output torque of both the electric motor and the internal combustion engine, is only available when the planetary gear set is locked. This fact is acknowledged by Lateur, for example, at col. 6, line 27. Additional disclosures of possible interest include U.S. Pat. No. 5,845,731 to Buglione et al; this patent issued Dec. 8, 1998, and therefore is not necessarily available as a reference against the claims of the present application. The basic powertrain shown by Buglione et al includes an internal combustion engine 12, coupled through a first clutch 18 to a first electric motor 20, coupled to a second electric motor 26 through a second clutch 24; the wheels are (apparently; see col. 3, line 8) driven by the second motor 26. The overall hybrid operational scheme provided by Buglione et al is illustrated in FIG. 4. At low speeds one or both motors may be used to propel the vehicle, with the engine off, idling, or running to drive one motor as a generator. During low-speed cruising the second motor propels the vehicle, while during high-speed cruising, the engine propels the vehicle. When acceleration is required at high speed, the engine and both motors may be used to propel the vehicle. Buglione et al also indicates that a variable-ratio transmission may be unnecessary, col. 3, line 9, and that the first motor can be used to start the engine, col. 4, lines 8-15.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,586,613 to Ehsani, showing an “electrically peaking hybrid” vehicle is also of interest Ehsani's vehicle is shown in several embodiments; in each, an engine is apparently to be run continuously, with excess torque used to charge the batteries, and one or more motors used to provide additional propulsive torque when the engine's output torque is inadequate. A transmission is provided in some embodiments of the Ehsani vehicle. An embodiment involving two motors is shown in FIG. 7, and can be modified as discussed in the text at col. 9, lines 4-5. FIG. 7 itself shows driving a first set of wheels by a first “electric machine”, i.e., a motor capable of operation as a generator. This drive arrangement is independent of a second drive arrangement, whereby a second set of wheels is driven by an engine connected through a first clutch to a second electric machine, connected to the second set of wheels by a second clutch. Ehsani suggests at col. 9, lines 4-5 that the drive shaft otherwise coupled to the first electric machine could also be driven by the engine. Although it is not made explicit that the first electric machine is to be retained, this seems likely; otherwise, the modified FIG. 7 embodiment would be the same as Ehsani's FIG. 1, modified to have all four wheels driven by a common driveshaft. This application discloses a number of improvements over and enhancements to the hybrid vehicles disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,343,970 (the “'970 patent”), to one of the present inventors, which is incorporated herein by this reference. Where differences are not mentioned, it is to be understood that the specifics of the vehicle design shown in the '970 patent are applicable to the vehicles shown herein as well. Discussion of the '970 patent herein is not to be construed to limit the scope of its claims. Generally speaking, the '970 patent discloses hybrid vehicles wherein a controllable torque transfer unit is provided capable of transferring torque between an internal combustion engine, an electric motor, and the drive wheels of the vehicle. The direction of torque transfer is controlled by a microprocessor responsive to the mode of operation of the vehicle, to provide highly efficient operation over a wide variety of operating conditions, and while providing good performance. The flow of energy—either electrical energy stored in a substantial battery bank, or chemical energy stored as combustible fuel—is similarly controlled by the microprocessor. For example, according to the operating scheme of the hybrid vehicle disclosed in the '970 patent, in low-speed city driving, the electric motor provides all torque needed responsive to energy flowing from the battery. In high-speed highway driving, where the internal-combustion engine can be operated efficiently, it typically provides all torque; additional torque may be provided by the electric motor as needed for acceleration, hill-climbing, or passing. The electric motor is also used to start the internal-combustion engine, and can be operated as a generator by appropriate connection of its windings by a solid-state, microprocessor-controlled inverter. For example, when the state of charge of the battery bank is relatively depleted, e.g., after a lengthy period of battery-only operation in city traffic, the internal combustion engine is started and drives the motor at between 50 and 100% of its maximum torque output, for efficient charging of the battery bank. Similarly, during braking or hill descent, the kinetic energy of the vehicle can be turned into stored electrical energy by regenerative braking.
The hybrid drive train shown in the '970 patent has many advantages with respect to the prior art which are retained by the present invention. For example, the electric drive motor is selected to be of relatively high power, specifically, equal to or greater than that of the internal combustion engine, and to have high torque output characteristics at low speeds; this allows the conventional multi-speed vehicle transmission to be eliminated. As compared to the prior art, the battery bank, motor/generator, and associated power circuitry are operated at relatively high voltage and relatively low current, reducing losses due to resistive heating and simplifying component selection and connection. It can thus be seen that while the prior art, including the '970 patent, clearly discloses the desirability of operating an internal combustion engine in its most efficient operating range, and that a battery may be provided to store energy to be supplied to an electric motor in order to even out the load on the internal combustion engine, there remains substantial room for improvement. In particular, it is desired to obtain the operational flexibility of a parallel hybrid system, while optimizing the systems operational parameters and providing a substantially simplified parallel hybrid system as compared to those shown in the prior art, again as including the '970 patent. As noted above, the present application is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No. 09/264,817, filed Mar. 9, 1999 (the '817 application), which discloses and claims several distinct improvements over the hybrid vehicles shown in the '970 patent, as discussed in further detail below. Similarly, the present application is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No. 09/392,743, filed Sep. 9, 1999 (the '743 application), which discloses and claims several distinct improvements over the hybrid vehicles shown in the '970 patent and the '817 application, as discussed in further detail below. The present application discloses and claims further improvements over the vehicles of the '817 and '743 applications. As discussed in detail below, the '817 and '743 applications (which are not to be limited by this brief summary) disclose a new “topology” for a hybrid vehicle, wherein an internal combustion engine and a first electric “starting” motor, which can be operated as a starter, to start the engine, a generator, to charge the battery bank responsive to torque from the engine or the wheels (i.e., during regenerative braking) or as a source of torque, to propel the vehicle, are connected to the road wheels of the vehicle through a clutch, so that the engine can be decoupled from the wheels during starting and battery charging, but can be connected to the wheels to propel the vehicle. A second “traction” motor is directly connected to the road wheels to propel the vehicle. The vehicle operating mode is determined by a microprocessor responsive to the “road load”, that is, the vehicle's instantaneous torque demands. The '743 application further discloses that a turbocharger may be provided, and operated when needed to increase the torque output of the engine when torque in excess of its normally-aspirated capacity is required for more than a minimum time. The present application builds further on these concepts. Koide U.S. Pat. No. 5,934,395 and Schmidt-Brucken U.S. Pat. No. 6,059,059 were addressed during the prosecution of the '817 application. Tsuzuki U.S. Pat. No. 6,018,198 and Werson U.S. Pat. No. 5,986,376 were also each applied against one claim. As indicated, the '817 application discloses a hybrid vehicle comprising a controller, a battery bank, an internal combustion engine, and two electric motors, a starting motor and a traction motor. The starting motor and engine are connected to the road wheels through a clutch, while the traction motor is connected directly and permanently to the road wheels for torque transmission there between, i.e., without a clutch there between. Koide does not show this “topology” for a hybrid vehicle; although Koide does show a hybrid vehicle having first and second motors along with an engine, the components are not connected as described. Specifically, in Koide, both motors and the engine are connected to the road wheels by way of a variable-ratio transmission and a clutch, while, as noted, in the '817 application only the combination of the engine and starting motor is connected to the wheels through a clutch, while the traction motor is connected directly to the wheels for torque transmission there between, that is, without a clutch or variable-ratio transmission. More specifically, Koide's entire disclosure is premised on being able to vary the ratios between the torque-producing components of his system and the road wheels, in order that the engine can be smoothly started when needed. According to the '817 application, only the starter motor and engine need to be disconnectable from the wheels for smooth starting, while the traction motor can be connected to the road wheels at all times. This represents a substantial simplification with respect to the system shown by Koide.
The Schmidt-Brucken patent also fails to show the topology shown in the '817 application. Schmidt-Brucken shows an engine 1 in combination with a starting motor 7, connected to the road wheels through a first clutch 11, and a traction motor 19 connected to the road wheels through a second clutch 23. The '817 and '743 applications also disclose that the vehicle operating mode is determined by a microprocessor responsive to the “road load”, that is, the vehicle's instantaneous torque demands, i.e., that amount of torque required to propel the vehicle at a desired speed. The operator's input, by way of the accelerator or brake pedals, or a “cruise control” device, indicates that continuing at steady speed is desired, or that a change in vehicle speed is called for. For example, the operator's depressing the accelerator pedal signifies an increase in desired speed, i.e., an increase in road load, while reducing the pressure on the accelerator or depressing the brake pedal signifies a desired reduction in vehicle speed, indicating that the torque being supplied is to be reduced or should be negative. More particularly, it is important to note that the road load can vary between wide limits, independent of vehicle speed, and can be positive or negative, i.e., when decelerating or descending a hill, in which case the negative road load (that is, torque available at the wheels in excess of that required to propel the vehicle) is usually employed to charge the battery bank. More particularly, it is important to recognize that road load is not the same thing as vehicle velocity. Indeed, as noted, road load can be negative while vehicle velocity is positive, as during deceleration or descent. Moreover, widely differing road loads may be encountered during operation at the same velocity; for example, operation at 50 mph on a flat road may involve a road load of only 30-40% of the engine's maximum output torque, while accelerating from the same speed while climbing a hill may involve a road load of well over 100% of maximum output torque. By the same token, control of the vehicle's operating mode in response to monitoring of road load is not the same as controlling its operating mode in response to vehicle speed. Numerous prior art references, including the Koide and Schmidt-Brucken patents, teach. the latter, i.e., indicate the vehicle operating mode should be controlled in response to vehicle speed. See Koide at col. 12, lines 45-48, and Schmidt-Brucken at col. 5, line 56-col. 6 lines 29. Neither Koide nor Schmidt-Brucken, nor any other reference of which the inventors are aware, recognizes that the desired vehicle operational mode should preferably be controlled in response to the vehicle's actual torque requirements, i.e., the road load. Doing so according to the invention provides superior performance, in terms of both vehicle response to operator commands and fuel efficiency, under the widely-varying conditions encountered in “real world” driving situations, than is possible according to the prior art. Moreover, as set forth in the '817 and '743 applications, in order to provide maximum efficiency in use of fuel, it is essential to operate the internal combustion engine of a hybrid vehicle only under circumstances where the engine will be loaded so as to require at least 30% of its maximum torque output (“MTO”) (it being understood throughout this specification and the appended claims that this 30% figure is arbitrary and can be varied). If the vehicle is controlled to shift into an engine-only mode whenever it exceeds some arbitrary road speed, as in Koide and Schmidt-Brucken, it is apparent that the engine will be operated at various times when the road load is less than 30% of MTO, for example, during deceleration or during descents. Moreover, as noted above, the torque actually required can vary widely irrespective of vehicle speed. For example, 30% of MTO may be sufficient to maintain steady speed on a flat road, but 150% of MTO may be required for acceleration from the same speed. If the vehicle's operational mode is selected based solely on speed, as taught by Koide and Schmidt-Brucken, it will be incapable of responding to the operator's commands, and will ultimately be unsatisfactory.
By comparison, according to the invention of the '817 and '743 applications, and as further disclosed and claimed herein, the vehicle's operating mode—that is, the selection of the source of torque needed to propel the vehicle—is determined based on the amount of torque actually required. In this way the proper combination of engine, traction motor, and starting motor is always available. This apparently-simple point has evidently been missed entirely by the art. Moreover, according to this aspect of the invention, the engine is used to propel the vehicle only when it is efficient to do so. This is in accordance with another aspect of the invention, wherein the engine is operated only at high efficiency, leading directly to improved fuel economy. For example, the engine is also used as needed to charge the battery bank, e.g., in low-speed city driving, where the battery bank may become depleted. The starter motor, which is operated as a generator in these circumstances, is accordingly sized so as be able to accept at least 30% of MTO as input torque; the battery bank is likewise sized so as to be able to accept a corresponding amount of charging current. Therefore the engine is never operated at less than 30% of MTO, and is thus never operated inefficiently. Koide and Schmidt-Brucken, because they teach switching the vehicle's operational mode based on vehicle speed and not its torque requirements, would inherently operate the engine under less efficient conditions.
Furutani U.S. Pat. No. 5,495,906 discloses selection of operating mode based on a combination of vehicle speed and “vehicle load”; see, e.g., col. 2, lines 39-47: “It is preferable that the running state detection means detects vehicle speed and vehicle load . . . [and] that the control means transfers the driving force generated by the engine to the power generator and changes the electric power generated by the power generator [i.e., more of the engine power is used to charge the batteries] in accordance with the vehicle load if the vehicle speed is the predetermined value or less. Moreover, it is preferable to change the predetermined value of the vehicle speed in accordance with the vehicle load.” It thus appears that Furutani determines the vehicle operating state based on vehicle speed, although the change-over speed can be varied responsive to the vehicle load. Furutani's “vehicle load” thus apparently includes the torque required to charge the battery, as distinguished from applicants' “road load”, i.e., the torque required to propel the vehicle. Even assuming that Furutani's “vehicle load”, which is not defined, were suggestive of “road load” as used by applicants, Furutani clearly does not suggest determining the operating mode based on road load. More specifically, although Furutani recognizes a distinction between differing vehicle loads, and that the vehicle load can vary independent of vehicle speed, the vehicle operating mode is nonetheless selected based on vehicle speed; see col. 3, line 62-col. 4, line 32. Instead of varying the operating mode of the vehicle based on road load, Furutani directs more or less of the engine's torque to battery charging; see col. 4, lines 24-32. Frank U.S. Pat. No. 6,054,844 shows several embodiments of hybrid vehicles. In those where an engine is used to provide torque to the vehicle wheels, a continuously-variable transmission is employed, and the ratio R is considered in determining the response to be made to operator input, e.g., accelerator and brake pedal positions. Frank's control strategy is to operate the engine along a line of optimal efficiency and use an electric motor to add to or subtract from the engine's output torque as appropriate. See col. 6, line 49-col. 7, line 7 and col. 10, line 33-col. 11, line 22. Frank thus does not suggest control of the vehicle operating mode responsive to road load.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,018,694 to Egami et al shows a controller for a hybrid vehicle comprising an internal combustion engine and first and second “rotary electric units”. Although the question is not free from doubt, it appears from a detailed review of Egami's disclosure that torque from the engine is not supplied directly to the road wheels, but instead is used to drive one of the rotary electric units as a generator, in turn supplying the second with current to provide torque for propelling the vehicle. Hence Egami does not show selection of the operational mode of the vehicle (that is, the determination whether propulsive torque is to be provided from the engine, one or both of the motors, or all three) in response to the road load, since it does not appear that propulsive torque is ever supplied from the engine to the wheels. Moreover, despite making reference to a “vehicle driving torque demand Mv*”, which might be misunderstood to be equivalent to applicant's road load, Egami in fact does not determine the road load. More specifically, Mv* is determined by consulting a “map”, using “the vehicle speed V, the accelerator lift ACC, the brake state BRK, and the shift position SFT as the input parameters”. See col. 22, lines 23-26. The same point, i.e., that the “vehicle driving torque demand Mv*” is not equivalent to applicant's claimed road load, is made throughout Egami's extensive specification; see, for example, col. 10, lines 28-32 and col. 27, lines 58-65.
Deguchi U.S. Pat. No. 5,993,351 refers to decision-making regarding the vehicle mode of operation “based on the vehicle speed detected value and the required motive force detected value” (Abstract; see also col. 1, line 41); the latter might be misunderstood to be equivalent to the road load. Deguchi also states (col. 2, lines 7-9) that the vehicle “runs on the motor at times of low load and runs on the internal combustion engine at times of high load”. However, Deguchi makes it clear that in fact the operational-mode decision is made “based on the accelerator aperture detected value theta.
which represents the required driving force of the vehicle and the detected vehicle speed” (col. 5, lines 19-21). The accelerator position and vehicle speed signals are the only relevant inputs to the vehicle controller shown in FIG. 2. Hence Deguchi does not show controlling the vehicle operating mode responsive to road load as defined by applicants.
Along similar lines, Boll U.S. Pat. No. 5,327,992 teaches a hybrid vehicle comprising a diesel engine and a motor on a common shaft, and intended to be operated such that the engine is only operated efficiently, i.e., under relatively high load. The torque required to overcome the “instantaneous tractive resistance” is determined responsive to the deflection of the accelerator pedal, i.e., in response to operator command (see col. 3, line 13 and line 35); when this is less than the minimum amount of torque that can be produced efficiently by the engine, the excess torque is used to power the motor as a generator. Boll also suggests that both the motor and engine can be used to propel the vehicle when needed, e.g., during acceleration, and that the vehicle can be operated in four different modes: (a) engine alone powering the vehicle; (b) motor only powering the vehicle, with the
engine “generally switched off”; (c) engine and motor both powering the vehicle; and (d) engine powering vehicle, with excess torque powering motor in generator mode. Boll also teaches that a second motor can be provided, operable as a generator and then driven either by the engine directly or by exhaust gas, and that the resulting current can be used to charge the battery or to power the other motor. Other references of interest are directed to the braking systems of hybrid vehicles, see for example German patent 19 05 641 to Strifler, discussing a method of control of a braking system providing both regenerative and mechanical braking, and the powering of ancillary systems, such as power steering pumps, see U.S. Pat. No. 5,249,637 to Heidl.
Substantial attention has been paid to reduction of pollutants emitted by automobiles and other commuter vehicles. There are many attempts of reducing the pollutants in the atmosphere by reducing the fuel consumption used by automobiles and other highway commuter vehicles. There have also been suggestions of using alternative fuels such as burning mixtures of gasoline and ethanol or pure ethanol. This would be a start at reducing emissions; however the cost of converting the existing fuel infrastructure would outweigh gaining public interest and confidence. One proposal for reducing pollution in cities is to limit the use of vehicles powered by internal combustion engines and instead employ electric vehicles powered by rechargeable batteries. To date, most straight electric vehicles, require substantial time for battery recharging, have insufficient power for hill climbing and acceleration except when the batteries are fully charged and have had very limited range; typically no more than 150 miles. This latent defect of limited mileage was eliminated with hybrid electric vehicles that incorporated some form of internal combustion engine to power a generator function in conjunction with an electric motor.
The attempts of creating series hybrid electric vehicle for automotive use to reduce emissions has been suggested, but again this type of hybrid vehicle also uses some form of a combustible engine to power a generator which emits pollutants. Even the more promising parallel hybrid vehicle or the series-parallel vehicles known as Toyota Prius employs an internal combustion engine in conjunction with an electric motor emits carbon dioxide when the combustible engine functions to drive or generate power. There have been numerous patents above that disclose various hybrid vehicle drives tending to fall into one or more of the categories of either a series or parallel hybrid vehicle. It is obvious to anyone that there are many variations of the hybrid vehicle. These variations range from having a torque transmission unit for combining torque to the drive wheels, to a parallel hybrid drive train wherein torque from two electric motors is combined; to series-parallel hybrid vehicles, to complex gearing arrangements, including multiple speed transmissions. These variations in HEVs are all made with an attempt at reducing carbon dioxide emissions and increase fuel economy by employing a combustible engine that propels the vehicle in certain situations or part time. As long as there is a combustible engine that functions in any situation of any vehicle, carbon dioxide emissions will never be fully eliminated. Furthermore, the existing hybrid vehicles have not been immediately successful at reducing greenhouse emissions completely.